Cirrus 22 Crash - 1 Dead. Crisis.

[Sheilanagig]

Unfortunately another fatality, 3 SR22 crashes in two weeks, 6 dead.

This on top of the other fatalities.

Icing,... deployed chute,... too fast for deployment, ....result.........

We have been warned, there are no excuses.

May the pilot rest in peace.

[Vino Collapso]

We seem to be going around in circles here......

If what you say is correct then icing is not fussy about what type of aircraft it clings to.

As for the rest, well IF the chute was deployed at too higher speed then its hardly the aircrafts fault.

[MichaelJP59]

What happens if the chute is deployed at too high a speed?

Does it tear away from its mountings leaving you no worse off than before or does it billow around causing problems?

[dublinpilot]

Is there anything to suggest that your average Piper or Cessna would have survived this iceing encounter?

If not, then what exactly is your point?

I'm sure the police could tell us how many people died last week in Ford Mondeos. Does that mean that Ford Mondeos are unsafe cars?

We all know that flying is a dangerous hobby. Flying into iceing conditions in a non-deiced aircraft is particularly dangerous, and not allowed. If you want to give your point any weight, you'll have to do better than simply state that there has been an accident in a Cirrus.

dp

[Confabulous]

This Cirrus bashing is getting ridiculous to say the least. If you go outside the POH, you are officially a test pilot, since you're trying something experimental. GA pilots are in general (except for Genghis and a few others) are not qualified test pilots, and if they push the envelope will get bitten - hard.

Every accident related to the Cirrus so far has been human factor or engine related - CFIT's, bad judgement, engine failure etc.

DP has a good point - a Cessna or Piper would drill a big hole in the ground just as neatly, and with less of a struggle too.

Most Cirri have the TKS icing system, but the icing could have overpowered this, or maybe it just ran out - or maybe it just wasn't switched on.

Chances are if the BRS was deployed at too high a speed it would seriously damage the fuse structure - and the shock of opening could cause the wings to fail negative if it was excessive - not that it would matter, chances are the aircraft would snap in two. All depends on how the loads are being applied. But they would really have to be going fast for that to happen.

[Fuji Abound]

We have been warned, there are no excuses.

These repetitve posts about accidents involving Cirrus are getting boring to say the least. What is you point!!

We should all learn from accidents if we can and if these accidents point to a problem with a particular aircraft type then we want to know. However you present no evidence what so ever. On the whole comments on this site are well informed, considered and can be substantiated. If there is an identifiable problem with Cirrus say so and justify your comment if not apply for a job as a reporter and write shock horror stories for an appropriate newspaper

We are sorry to hear of the crash and if icing was the cause it re-enforces this risk.

[bar shaker]

Confabulous

I agree with you and I think we only hear about these as its the new aircraft on the scene.

However, one thing I have wondered about the fatalities...

Does the provision of a BRS create a false sense of security, leading the pilots into dangerous situations that they would have otherwise avoided?

[Sheilanagig]

Vino. Er yes it is actually..although fussy is a technical term I would not have used myself. High performance wings actually suffer worse that others - recent Challenger crash at Aspen is an example - but dont get me wrong here, ice on any wing is BAD, but take a high peformance wing and add in dodgy stall issues (SR22) and throw ice in on top and then we really are into testpilot land

Michael 59. Good question.
I have spoken to many Cirrus owners and opinions are varied. You may be lucky and it might rip off,... or it may act as the worlds biggest drag chute in which case you are in the deepest doodoo..actually horrific to think about.

Dub guy. Now I wouldnt say the Ford Mondeo is a dangerous car, but remember the Ford Pinto. Dangerous yes. Its a fact some products Cars, Aircraft, Medicine, you name it, are more dangerous than others. a good clue is to go to the NTSB website and find out which types are MORE dangerous than others. The SR22 is currently running at 3 times the mean of its nearest rival in the 'dangerous' stakes.

Con.

The same Con that told us before in a previous thread that the cirrus was JAR certified.

"Most Cirri have the TKS icing system, but the icing could have overpowered this, or maybe it just ran out - or maybe it just wasn't switched on." TRUE I agree completely.

"Chances are if the BRS was deployed at too high a speed it would seriously damage the fuse structure - and the shock of opening could cause the wings to fail negative if it was excessive " TRUE . Perhaps you might pass this info to KITKAT who (depite his 600+ hours on type) has stated previously that the "CAPS can be deployed at any spped".


Guys. It all about the WING.

I will be suprised if Cirrus dont radically redesign within the next year.

[valenii]

Still the best GA tourer available....no crisis!

Does the provision of a BRS create a false sense of security, leading the pilots into dangerous situations that they would have otherwise avoided?

That is an easy question to answer.

Every Cirrus pilot I know is a pilot first and a Cirrus Pilot second.

The Cirrus aircraft does provide better situational awareness, better single pilot workload due to excellent aircraft automation, better flying characteristics, completely predicatable flight envelope and better comfort. All of which can lead a safe pilot to fly safer. However there is nothing to protect the aircraft from a reckless pilot or a pilot flying outside of the published limits or his own ability.

This accident probably could have been prevented if the pilot had taken the CAPS option earlier, therefore if there is anything that makes the Cirrus dangerous its traditionalists trying to recover aircraft from emergencies without using all available safety features.

This guy should have pulled the chute earlier, at FL160 his IAS would have been below the max demonstrated CAPS deployment speed even before he started picking up ice. My guess is he lost control trying to execute an emergency decent in an iced up aircraft. Since he was over mountains, he should have pulled the chute at the first indication that the aircraft had "departed from controled flight".

I cannot understand was motivates people to bash a new design of aircraft.

I will make an offer here: If anyone in the UK is in anyway sceptical about the design of the Cirrus, and is privately or publically bad mouthing what I believe is the biggest step forward in GA for 30 years, they can contact me and I will give them an hour or so hands on in one with me sitting beside them, and they can then make their comments from a position of experirnce rather than speculation.

No strings attatched. I will say nothing except to guide them through the check list, keep them safe and make sure they land properly.

I await the call 07967965298

The SR22 is currently running at 3 times the mean of its nearest rival in the \'dangerous\' stakes.

Actually, it depends what figures you look at.

If you compare accidents just in new top of the range Cessnas singles, sold over the same period as the SR22 has been available, and adjusted for fleet size, the SR22 is twice as safe as the Cessna.

This is a sensible comparison, as we are dealing with the same kind of pilots (looking for a new high performance aircraft, and typically buying them for similar reasons) and the same preiod of time.

Ian

[Vino Collapso]

Vino. Er yes it is actually..although fussy is a technical term I would not have used myself. High performance wings actually suffer worse that others - recent Challenger crash at Aspen is an example - but dont get me wrong here, ice on any wing is BAD, but take a high peformance wing and add in dodgy stall issues (SR22) and throw ice in on top and then we really are into testpilot land

So do not take the aircraft knowingly into iceing conditions beyond the capability of TKS (if fitted). Which means if a pilot does ice one up then his actions are in question rather than the aeroplane design regardless of how critical the wing is.

I have never flown a Cirrus (or even sat in one) and I am not a fan of this modern technology, which I think can lead the unwary into over over confidence, but if the aircraft is flown within its design envelope there is no reason to consider it dangerous.

Regards

Vino

[Evo]

I will make an offer here: If anyone in the UK is in anyway sceptical about the design of the Cirrus, and is privately or publically bad mouthing what I believe is the biggest step forward in GA for 30 years, they can contact me and I will give them an hour or so hands on in one with me sitting beside them, and they can then make their comments from a position of experirnce rather than speculation.

Ian, with an offer like that I'm almost tempted to start bad-mouthing it so that I qualify...

[Sheilanagig]

Vino.

I have (and do) fly in a SR22 which I (mea culpa) in a moment of pure lazyness recommended about two years ago to a PPL that approached me for advise, after minimal research and buying the CAPS PR (mea maxima culpa).

I unlike you ,AM a fan of the technology, provided the training is sufficient. Its what I fly (most) all of the time.

But your main point is absolutely correct ,stay out of icing in any aircraft that is not certified for such, - other aircraft may scare you this one will kill.

[deice]

Be surprised! They won't redesign the wing. I'd wager a cold one on that.
What's the point speculating on an accident where we don't really know what happened and why. The NTSB will issue their professional opinion so that we may learn from it.

If you have a personal preference to Piper and Cessna aircraft designed in 1950, please keep flying them.

Let those who believe there has been some progress since, enjoy the new stuff. You may be aware people get killed in other brands as well, regardless of their 50-year history. Sometimes it doesn't have anything to do with the aircraft.

Icing conditions, as any pilot knows, is very bad indeed. Aircraft sporting boots, heated leading edges and TKS icing all suffer from the same problem. If you can't get rid of the ice, you go down, fast. I'm sure the TKS deice system on the Cirrus fleet is intended to aid your escape from icing conditions, just like on any other aircraft.

Doesn't help if you're in a Caravan, ATR-42, B737 or SR-22.

[Sheilanagig]

Deice.

"........just like on any other aircraft.

Doesn't help if you're in a Caravan, ATR-42, B737 or SR-22."

Now which 737 would that be?

[Genghis the Engineer]

I've been noting the discussion going on about the Cirrus aircraft with interest. I've never flown one, nor worked knowingly for any company with a commercial interest in the aircraft - so I'm both as disinterested and uninformed as it's possible to be whilst remaining a professionally interested aviation professional

Starting with the NTSB database, I can find quite a few reports of fatal accidents. These are:-

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=ATL04FA096&rpt=p
(preliminary report into SR20 N8157J, from limited eyewitness accounts, appears to have spun in without chute operation).

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=CHI04FA255&rpt=p
(preliminary report into SR22 N1223S, insufficient evidence to come to any conclusions at-all)

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=SEA05FA023&rpt=p
(preliminary report into SR22 N1159C, again from limited evidence, appears to have been a LOC at low level during low-speed manoeuvring, possibly associated with a flap mechanism failure).

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=IAD05FA032&rpt=p
(Preliminary report into SR22 N889JB, appears to be CFIT in IMC)

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=SEA05FA038&rpt=p
(Preliminary report into SR22 N6057M, appears to be CFIT in IMC)

On October 12, 2003, at 1105 coordinated SR-22, N100BR crashed in Spain, the report doesn't seem to be available in English.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?...03FA072&rpt=fi
(Full report into SR20 N893MK, appears to have flown into powerlines after deviation from an IMC approach procedure, probably due to pilot being confused by ATC).

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?...03FA057&rpt=fa
(Full report into SR22 N9523P, low hour pilot in marginal VMC at low level, CFIT)

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?...03FA029&rpt=fa
(Full report into SR20 N566T, non-IR pilot, strayed into IMC, CFIT)

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?...02FA089&rpt=fa
(Full report into SR22 N837CD, stall/spin, failure to recover or operate chute - some suspicion that chute may have malfunctioned)

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?...02FA162&rpt=fa
(Full report into SR20 N901CD, CFIT in VMC due to rising ground and high density altitude)

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?...01FA145&rpt=fa
(Full report into SR20 N116CD, CFIT during inadvertent IMC, chute apparently not deployed, nor any attempt made)


This is superficial, so I'll make a superficial analysis and by all means anybody argue with me.

(1) The majority of these accidents involve pilots pressing on into conditions for which they at-least were unsuited.

I'm going to be controversial here, but this does look remarkably similar to the trend we saw in the UK a few years ago with privately owned light helicopters often suffering not dissimilar accidents. It was never published as such, but commonly believed that the comfortable environment of the cockpit, and the "I am infallible" attitude of many people who could afford to run a private helicopter (young successful businessmen / media people in large part) tended to lead to considerable over-confidence. Could this be common to the Cirrus?

(2) There are a smaller number of accidents with a definite tendency towards stall / spin.

It was quite controversial during the approval of the Cirrus that the use of the BRS allowed them to avoid showing compliance with the part 23 requirements to demonstrate a spinning assessment. It's interesting that these stall-spin accidents are happening (well, stalls happen to most light aircraft sooner or later), but a proportion of pilots don't seem to be pulling the handle. Why?, no idea - confidence?, lack of trust?, lack of familiarity?

It does beg the question of how good the stall warning and stall characteristics are. Not having flown the type, I can only ask this question not answer it.

But, there are no structural failures, and no losses of control (beyond stall/spin) leading to a fatality. So, it doesn't look like a deeply dangerous aeroplane from the evidence there - just one in which two areas need to be matters for significant pilot caution.

A superficial analysis, by all means shoot it down

G

[Vino Collapso]

A superficial analysis, by all means shoot it down

No shots being fired by me

I will bet good beer money on the POH being amended to give more warning on stall/spin characteristics and clarification on parachute deployment.

R

Vino

[Confabulous]

Thanks Genghis, we can always rely on you to bring a large measure of objectivity and fact to the proceedings. Very interesting reading!

The same Con that told us before in a previous thread that the cirrus was JAR certified.

The Cirrus SR20 is JAR certificated. The SR22 is undergoing certification. Spins will be prohibited.

It's aerodynamically impossible to spin an aircraft without stalling it first. Cirri follow the same rules of physics - if there is a stall/spin accident it is down to mishandling or misconfiguring the aircraft.

My theory - for what it's worth - is that the glass cockpit is giving a few pilots a newfound sense of bravery - they think the aircraft is foolproof, so they head into conditions they wouldn't take a steam guage equipped model. And they die.

With regards to the BRS - my gut feeling is that they might think it's a bit of a cheat to float out of danger. Humans aren't known for being logical under intense pressure unless they're very highly trained - military/test/airline pilots are a good example of how well trained you need to be to THINK in a spin, in IFR, with wing icing and terrain coming up to meet you. I've no idea how I would react in that situation - if I would react at all.

The SR20 and -22 have the same 'laminar flow' aerofoil - have there been as many stall/spin accidents in the SR20's? No. So that's the 'unsafe wing design' theory down the drain.

Bottom line: The SR22 is NOT an A320... there's no alpha floor (stall protection) function, it's responsive, and if you do the wrong thing at the wrong time, you'll probably die in it, as in any other aircraft.

Confab

PS:

Deice's comment about the 737 probably relates to 2 icing-related crashes - the rudder servo froze at high altitude and the aircraft experienced an uncommanded 'rudder hardover' - the rudder locked fully over in flight and the aircraft hit the ground vertically at 500kts.

[dublinpilot]

Valenii,

Would you extend the offer to those of us who are supporting the Cirrus?

If you are ever over in Ireland, I'd love to take you up on that offer. Even if it's just to have a look around airplane while on the ground, I'd be thrilled!

I'll pm you my phone number, and maybe you'd keep it, and let me know if you are ever this way?

Thank you
dp

[Confabulous]

Count me in too Valenii... you can zoom over to Dublin/Weston anytime, we'll give you a warm welcome

[Genghis the Engineer]

It's aerodynamically impossible to spin an aircraft without stalling it first. Cirri follow the same rules of physics - if there is a stall/spin accident it is down to mishandling or misconfiguring the aircraft

I'd slightly take issue with that statement. Whilst the spin is certainly a post-stall manoeuvre, in many aircraft it is much easier to cause a spin by inputting a yaw or roll input before the stall event than afterwards.

Out of interest, is anybody in a position to post the wording from the POH on the stall, incipient spin and stall recovery?

G